Come on
It's one thing for the fans to have a whinge and moan and complain of bias from the ref etc but, for a club chairman, not just to comment on decisions by an official or, to say that they made a mistake (which EVERY official and player does) but, to question their integrity is clearly bringing the game into disrepute.
Coaches are fined for questioning a ref's decision (whether they are right or wrong)
Under what circumstances can it be right for someone in McMannus' position to effectively call the ref a cheat.

Sorry but you are badly wrong in backing your chairman.

Even if that decision had cost you the cup, which it certainly didn't - your coaches selection of Coote seemed to take care of Saints chances of winning - a club CHARIMAN should not EVER question the integrity of the officials.

Most people would say something along the lines of I dont think "X" had his best game but to infer some form of deliberate bias or cheating is just wrong.

Simple question for you.
Do you think that Hicks made those calls because he dislikes Saints or just made a couple of incorrect calls ??
In real time, it didn't look like try so, as a neutral, I can understand why he said no try.
However, I also believe that he should have used the VR, just to be absolutely certain.

No, fans who wanted Saints to lose will have naturally found it hilarious and seen no fault in his performance. These things will naturally only occur to the team that loses, but it would be the same whoever it happened to. Imagine that Wakefield game yesterday was the Cup Final. Do you not think Wakefield would query the referee's family being on the terraces supporting Wigan after that error helped Wigan score the try from the 20 metre restart from the wrong place? (Of course someone should have tackled him and it's Wakey's fault they lost the game and are where they are, but none of that means the ref doesn't need to do their job properly).

Fully agree.In the sewer of professional football I cannot think of any owner,American,Russia,Chinese or British who resorts to such conduct.In cricket,a sport where Australian players,and others,cheat,and where there exists an anti-corruption unit I cannot think of any outspoken remarks against umpires.Nor from the sport of rugby union.

I would think any opportunity for blue chip sponsors has now permanently been lost,all because of some Totally Wicked,libellous conduct from the guy from the Totally Wicked stadium.

Beyond despair with this sport,now.

The inference that he is accusing Hicks of bias is your own. McManus worded his statement deliberately to put the blame squarely on the RFL and Hicks' appointment. He talks about the subconscious pressure he was placed under by the death threats from the Warrington fan and how that would have meant he wasn't put into that situation in the first place. There is no talk about Hicks being deliberately biased, just condemnation at his appointment in the first place given the pressure he'd be under. McManus is also right in that Hicks was in an impossible position, were Warrington to lose with a controversial decision going against them, he would have been hammered for that as well. Again, as McManus said, it's the perception of impartiality not existing that is the issue, a position Hicks would always struggle to avoid having been put in that position.

The only criticism he does place on Hicks (Again inferred) is agreeing to do the publicity stunt with Warrington and ITV. He should not have agreed to do that when he did, he should not have been allowed by the RFL to do that. The request from ITV should have been turned down or managed better. Whilst that piece was a very important one and a discussion point the game very much needs to air, doing so in the build up to the second biggest game of the season, featuring the team involved was just utter stupidity and incompetence from all concerned. It put Hicks in an impossible and unfair position.

I'm not blindly supporting McManus either. I've said a few times we shouldn't have aired this in public. The statement should have read, "Congrulations to Warrington, RFL we'll see you next Tuesday" and he should have been at the RFL's door first thing Tuesday morning (Because it was a bank holiday on Monday, don't go inferring controversial stuff to make a story out of this

).

Come on, that is blinkered nonsense and you know it. It's a simple issue: was Hicks biased or not? If he's saying Hicks had a subconscious bias, then he was biased. If he's saying he had a conscious bias, he is saying he was biased. He is using the word "perception" as a cloak in order to use the words "Hicks was biased" and whinge about losing the final, for a decision made when there were 76 minutes still to play and the scores were nil-nil.

One thing will flow from this, if McManus gets his way. If a ref wants to referee a major final, he can forget about complaining about death threats or having any constructive dialogue with any potential finalist. Instead, he just has to suck it up. That is no position to be in.

It is also a much different position than a ref being allowed to referee a game involving a club that he is a fan of, the rule that was amended, if I recall correctly, because Ganson bleated about missing out on the big games when Saints were in most of them. Fans might complain, but you won't see Michael Carter whinging about it in his next programme notes.

Whilst McManus might have tried somewhat to hide behind the cloak of ‘perceptions’, he did outright say that the perceptions of bias ”turned into reality”. At this point, he’s accusing Hicks of deliberately making decisions in Warrington’s favour, and followigs it by saying Hicks made ”highly questionable decisions” also in Warrington’s favour. He’s not inferring Hicks was biased, he’s making an outright accusation that he was biased “in reality” (again, McManus’ own words).
In terms of officiating, I think he could have said the decisions were incorrect - some would have agreed and some wouldn’t. What he cannot do, in his position, is accuse a referee of deliberate cheating and making decisions based on favouring a particular team.

Again, Saints glossing over the fact that had Saints won We wouldn’t have heard a peep from McManus regarding the officials.

And here’s something for biased, the head of referees or whatever his title is is a Saints fan.

If nothing else, it has given me someone to root for in the play-offs: Anyone But Saints.

Yes, so , as he DID NOT do that, stop defending him. The fact that so many neutral fans on here, for whom Warrington are hardly a 'favourite club', are seeing it as a no-no should alert you to your own bias in defending the indefensible.

As a Saints fan I find all of this quite ridiculous.

I think McManus has some valid points (can you imagine the FA appointing a ref to, say, a Man U v Liverpool FA Cup Final the week after said ref had been splashed over the press meeting fan(s)/Chief Exec re: death threats from a fan of one of the finalists? It simply wouldn't happen because, frankly, it's a stupid move).

More importantly though, it is thoroughly embarrassing to be bleating about it publically and I'm disppointed in EM and the club for behaving in this manner.

I might just start posting pictures like this whenever a saints fan makes a spurious comment(basically lies) about hicks 'having a shocker'

A poor point badly made....and you've made it twice.

he didnt but cos of mcmanus's rant about something that happened at the beginning of the game now has saints fans believing he did, most of us have had a lot worse referee perfomances against our teams this year.

"some people may have thought the perception of impartiality had gone. not me though, i totally thought he was impartial. and that perception was consolidated by many. but again not me, in reality, when hicks incomprehensibly didnt go upstairs for morgan knowles try. Obviously i know the reason he didnt go upstairs was because he was sure in his decision that the ball hadn't been grounded, but other people might perceive it differently, i mean i cant help it if they see it the way i have just laid out, its entirely their own perception of reality. supporters (but not me) have been dissatisfied with officating standards for decades (but not me i think its great) and its driving fans away. It's not the price of a game or the rubbish on the pitch driving people away, its totally the refereeing standard doing that. or so ive heard. from spectators. i dont think that way"

One of the most OTT posts of the year on VT, give your head a good shake m'lad before you post.
.
[iClassy Warrington.[/i
.
Warrington's Steward vicious attack on a Widnes supporter.
.
Warrington's fans causing trouble with Wigan early in the season.
.
Warrington's attacking the VIP box at Catalans.
.
Warrington's brick attack on Saints Coaches.
.
Warrington's death threat to a referee.
.
Warrington's tea and biscuit invitation to a referee and then getting the gig to officiate a Warrington v Saints Cup Final.
.
Warrington's fans using Pyrotechnics at home and away grounds.
.
These are factual issues which would concern any potential sponsors and not what has been written in a Saints Official Match Programme.

Brilliant. Knew it would be Warrington's fault . Ridiculous modern day political notion of deflecting one's failures/cock ups by pointing out an opponent's and not taking any ownership. Well you know all that Warrington stuff (bar the Wigan thing you've invented) Well we did all that cos McManus is an ill-informed hitter fool. Not our fault.

Quote ="ratticusfinch"Brilliant. Knew it would be Warrington's fault . Ridiculous modern day political notion of deflecting one's failures/cock ups by pointing out an opponent's and not taking any ownership. Well you know all that Warrington stuff (=#BF0000bar the Wigan thing you've invented) Well we did all that cos McManus is an ill-informed hitter fool. Not our fault.'" The Cheshire Police Incident No is IML-348039 which you might think is my invention: https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/ne ... -warriors/

Quote ="ratticusfinch"Brilliant. Knew it would be Warrington's fault . Ridiculous modern day political notion of deflecting one's failures/cock ups by pointing out an opponent's and not taking any ownership. Well you know all that Warrington stuff (=#BF0000bar the Wigan thing you've invented) Well we did all that cos McManus is an ill-informed hitter fool. Not our fault.'" The Cheshire Police Incident No is IML-348039 which you might think is my invention: https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/ne ... -warriors/

This is turning into a bigger conspiracy than JFK in Dallas.

It was nothing but a rugby game that Warrington won fairly & squarely.

You mean the puff of smoke from the grassy Knowles? Ba-dum-tish!

I’ll get my coat...

I'm not too sure he will succeed in that. As sure as night follows day, Robert Hicks will get one of the semis, with Ben Thaler the other. He'll also get a 50/50 crack at the final, whoever is in it.

This would be vaguely interesting if Saints had lost a close one. As it was they were in the end pretty comprehensively outplayed and one bad decision wasn't the difference (unless McManus is saying his team are so mentally fragile that one bit of adversity caused them to lose the plot entirely).

It's all very embarrassing for Saints as far as I can see - and certainly won't age very well. They've won plenty of big games which were genuinely close but with refereeing decisions which were infinitely more controversial (Joynt's Voluntary Tackle FFS! The so-called knock on by Michael Withers!). It's just pitiful to see them wasting their time and emotional capital on this bull.

It would be massively unfair on Robert Hicks to put him under the pressure of refereeing St Helens again this season. They have to maintain the perception of impartiality. Me thinks it'll be Thaler and Mr Chris Kendall. We like him, he's a good ref you see



I'd be amazed if Hicks got any Warrington or St Helens games for the rest of this season. For his own good, give him the lesser games and leave him out of the play offs altogether. Let the pressure subside, let Saints capitulate in the final or semi finals under another referee and wipe the slate clean.

OR they can subject a low paid official to severe pressure and unnecessary abuse and deal with the fallout of that instead?

Not sure Mcmanus put anything out there when the double movement try against us won them the game at their place earlier this season with the last touch of the ball ? it would seem that he was in favour with Child at that moment.

DO NOT RESTART THE VOLUNTARY TACKLE THREAD!!! Why would you even post that!!! Joynt genuinely tripped, he was fatigued, when did you EVER see a voluntary tackle given!

You're a Salford fan. Your previous owner declared war on the RFL and repeatedly suggested a coup was the best way forward. But McManus is the anti-christ? From a one minute google search it seems criticism of referees is far from limited to McManus. It seems Leigh's owner did it, Koukash has, Carter has and none of those teams were near a final. Wigan even did it after their player assaulted an unconscious man once.

McManus is at fault for his bad timing and lack of class and nothing more. The content of what he said is perfectly valid (Whether you agree with it or not). He should have left the programme notes as a congratulations to Warrington and an apology to the fans and maybe had a sentance about having issues with the officiating and that he'd take it up through the proper channels.